Statistical relationships between journal use and research output at academic institutions in south korea

Scientometrics

Volumn 103, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 751-777

  Jung, Youngim ^a   Kim, Jayhoon ^a   So, Minho ^b   Kim, Hwanmin ^a  

^a Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI)   (South Korea)

^b Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Comparative analysis; Correlation analysis; Diachronic analysis; E Journaluse; Research output

Indexed keywords

EID: 85027937336     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1563-0     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Bollen, J., & Van de Sompel, H. (2008). Usage impact factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage- based impact metrics. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 136-149
2. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., & Chute, R. (2009). A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS One, 4(6), e6022. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006022
3. Brody, T., & Harnad, S. (2005). Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0503020. Accessed October 30, 2012
4. Choi, H., Kim, B., Jung, Y., & Choi, S. (2013). Korean scholarly information analysis based on Korea Science Citation Database (KSCD). Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 7(1), 1-33. doi:10.1080/09737766.2013.802625
5. CIBER Research Ltd. (2011). The journal usage factor: Exploratory data analysis. Stage 2 Final Report. http://www.projectcounter.org/documents/CIBER_final_report_July.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2013
6. COUNTER. (2008). Release 3 of the COUNTER code of practice for journals and databases http://www.projectcounter.org/code_practice.html Accessed November 8, 2010
7. Gorraiz, J., & Gumpenberger, G. (2010). Going beyond citation: SERUM—A new tool provided by a network of libraries. Liber Quarterly, 20(1), 80-93
8. Gumpenberger, C., Wernisch, A., & Gorraiz, J. (2012). Reality-check: Cost-related journal assessment from a practical point of view1,2. Journal of Scientometric Research, 1(1), 35-43
9. Howell, D. C. (2007). The analysis of missing data. In W. Outhwaite & S. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of social science methodology. London: Sage
10. International Coalition of Library Consortia. (2006). Revised guidelines for statistical measures of usage of web-based information resources. http://icolc.net/statement/revised-guidelines-statistical-measures-usage-web-based-information-resources. Accessed November 6, 2012
11. Jung, Y., & Kim, J. (2013). Hybrid standard platform for e-journal usage statistics management. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 215, 1105-1115. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5860-5_132
12. Jung, Y., Kim, J., & Kim, H. (2013). STM e-journal use analysis by utilizing KESLI usage statistics consolidation platform. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 7(2), 205-215. doi:10.1080/09737766.2013.832903
13. Larsen, P. O., & Von Ins, M. (2010). The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 84(3), 575-603. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2909426&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract. Accessed November 6, 2012
14. Matthews, T. E. (2009). Improving usage statistics processing for a library consortium: The virtual library of Virginia’s experience. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 21(1), 37-47. doi:10.1080/19411260902858573.
15. Miller, R. (1992). The influence of primary task on R&D laboratory evaluation: A comparative bibliometric analysis. R&D Management, 22, 003-020. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1992.tb00785.x.
16. Moed, H. F. (2005). Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10), 1088-1097. doi:10.1002/asi.20200.
17. National Science and Technology Commission. (2011). SCI Analysis Research. Daejeon: National Science and Technology Commission
18. NISO. (2007). Standardized usage statistics harvesting initiative (SUSHI): Z39.93. http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php. Accessed November 8, 2010
19. Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. http://arxiv.org/html/1204.4745v1. Accessed May, 4, 2012
20. Shepherd, P. (2011). The journal usage factor project: Results, recommendations and next steps. http://www.projectcounter.org/documents/Journal_Usage_Factor_extended_report_July.pdf. Accessed December 7, 2011
21. The PLoS Medicine Editors. (2006). The impact factor game: It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature. PLoS Medicine, 3(6), e291. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291
22. Vinkler, P. (2010). Scientometric assessments: Application of scientometrics for the purposes of science policy. The evaluation of research by scientometric indicators. Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing
23. Welch, J. M. (2005). Who says we’re not busy? Library web page usage as a measure of public service activity. Reference Services Review, 33(4), 371-379. doi:10.1108/00907320510631526
24. Wood, F. (1990). Factors influencing research performance of university academic staff. Higher Education, 19, 81-100
25. Yoon, H. (2007). Correlation analysis between national competitiveness and national research competitiveness in OECD countries. Journal of Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 41(1), 105-123
26. Zainab, A. N., Abrizah, A., Husna, M. Z. N., Raj, R. G., Aruna, T., Dzul Nizam, M. P., & ZUlfadhli, M. Z. (2012). Adding value to Malaysian scholarly journals through MyCite, Malaysian citation indexing system. In Proceedings of international conference on journal citation systems in Asia Pacific countries (pp. 1-16)